One more casualty of the absence of retroflex consonants in English. Before you jumped the gun, you should’ve taken into account the difference between ‘Ka’ and ‘kha’ consonants.
Erm, I think you are confusing retroflex consonants with aspirated consonants. "Kha" is just the aspirated version of "Ka". English doesn't have two different alphabets for these two different sounds and which one is used depends on the context (king vs sink). Indic languages on the other hand treat these as completely different sounds and there are many pairs of words which differ only in the non-aspiration/aspiration of one particular alphabet.
Interestingly, even though the IPA has the aspiration modifier letter, the transcriptions that you find in dictionaries seldom care to use them. For instance, the Cambridge dictionary lists the pronunciation of the word king as /kɪŋ/ but almost everyone actually says /kʰɪn/.
Interestingly, even though the IPA has the aspiration modifier letter, the transcriptions that you find in dictionaries seldom care to use them. For instance, the Cambridge dictionary lists the pronunciation of the word king as /kɪŋ/ but almost everyone actually says /kʰɪn/.
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/king